Discuss Immigration Issues with a Mexican American. Truth, Honesty and the American Way!

Friday, April 17, 2009

Governor Perry: YOU DON'T SPEAK FOR ME!!! It Is Time to IMPEACH Gov. Perry!

Texas Governor Perry is a TRAITOR and I for one say, YOU DON'T SPEAK FOR ME!!

I support our President! Governor Perry threatened to secede from the Union. How dare he make such baseless threats. Constitutionally, Texas cannot secede from the Union. How dare he threaten our President and our Government. Gov. Perry, YOU DO NOT SPEAK FOR ME!! I thought I would be the first to say: IMPEACH GOVERNOR PERRY! However, now I find there is an Impeach Perry website.

Their motto:

Some say just tar and feather Perry, like they did this poor soul at BostonTea Party. We believe even Rick Perry deserves a trial by his peers, the TexasSenate...on his impeachment.

Independent Texans, founded in 2001, has initiated this Impeach Perry campaign. We are turning Perry’s attacks on the people of Texas in to a mobilization of the 42% (and growing) plurality of voters who do not identify with a political party and who self-identify as independent with a small “i”. We know that many Republican and Democratic voters will join our ranks to make the call to Impeach Rick Perry louder and louder as we move beyond the 2008 Presidential election and in to the 2009 legislative session where an impeachment resolution can be filed.

We need to move this effort forward and start Impeachment proceedings immediately. He and many of his cohorts are making our state a laughing stock!!

The Obama administration suffered a bit of a legal setback this afternoon: a federal judge in California rejected the administration's assertion of the state secrets privilege in the civil suit brought by an Islamic charity that was allegedly subjected to illegal NSA surveillance. The order, in Al-Haramain v. Bush, requires the government to come up with a way to safeguard the classified information it plans to present in the NSA's defense by May 8. Judge Vaughn Walker noted that the government has elsewhere made provisions for the discussion of Top Secret/SCI information. It so happens that the plaintiffs attorneys have been cleared to that level. Walker crafted his order narrowly to prevent the government from appealing it immediately to the Ninth Circuit. On May 8, it will be interesting to see whether the administration presents a plan for safeguarding classified info -- or whether it re-asserts the state secrets privilege.PDF of the order here: http://politics.theatlantic.com/Order.April%252017.pdfMaybe I'm reading that wrong, but it would appear that the BOA is backing up what the Bush admin did....

Az,Quite a spin you have. How about a dose of reality for each of your points:1. He is not expanding the wrongful war in Iraq. He is looking into fixing the problems in Afghanistan that should have been addressed previously.2. Fixing the banking industry or letting it fall off a cliff.3. Cutting taxes for 95% of Americans and only increasing it for the richest 5%.

Az, Why are you concerned by a handshake between our Prez and Chavez? Chavez was elected by the people of Venezuela and overall is tremendously popular in their country. I know the right wing nuts don't like Chavez or Cuba. Are you turning Pat Robertson on me?

Personally I like that fact that our President is leading with Diplomacy vs Bush's Foot Stomping Bullying.

Besides, Bush was best friends with Saudi Arabia, the place where the majority of terrorists were from. Additionally we are friends with China and Russia. Their atrocities are much worse than any you can claim for Venezuela.

Az, I didn't read it that way. It was more, "how do you safeguard classified information in open court." So the question becomes, how to allow the courts to see the 10% wrong without displaying the 90% right.

Bush abused the privilege, but now, as usual, Obama is left to clean up his mess.

Obama speaks to not enforcing the law, granting amnesty to law breakers,socializing medicine,etc. Is he just another megalomaniac -- not much different from Perry but on the far left rather than the right?

Ultima,So you are disapproving of the Tea Parties? The ANTI Obama signs were ridiculous with their name calling etc.

As far as Perry, he is advocating breaking the law, a secession. That is unconstitutional.

Obama is working hard on fixing the problems created by the Bush Administration. He should be commended and supported, not name-called Hitler or Sadam or depicted holding a knife to US throat. The teabaggers were Wrong!

"Obama is working hard on fixing the problems created by the Bush Administration"Here we are pointing fingers again....

Does it really matter WHO was President when the banks decided to screw the American people? Many of the practices of the banks that led to this problem have been in place for 20+ years. It goes way beyond the previous 8.

The real issues is derivatives, which are scraps of worthless paper that companies sell for real money.

"Derivatives generate reported earnings that are often wildly overstated and based on estimates whose inaccuracy may not be exposed for many years." -Warren Buffet

Derivatives are complex financial transactions based upon underlying instruments like real estate, bonds or stocks and are of two main types; either bets about the direction of some market, or insurance, that takes on a hedging function against a market position.

The total amount of derivatives is now estimated (2006 mid-year market survey), by the International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA), to be over $283 trillion. That number is about 7 times the economic output of the entire world, at about $40 trillion.

The ISDA, which represents participants in the privately negotiated derivatives industry, is among the world’s largest global financial trade associations as measured by number of member firms. ISDA was chartered in 1985, and today has approximately 780 member institutions from 54 countries on six continents.

These members include most of the world's major institutions that deal in privately negotiated derivatives, as well as many of the businesses, governmental entities and other end users that rely on over-the-counter derivatives to manage efficiently the financial market risks inherent in their core economic activities.

Notional amount of credit default swaps grew by 52% in the first six months of the year to $26.0 trillion from $17.1 trillion. The annual growth rate for credit derivatives is 109% from $12.4 trillion at mid-year 2005. 88 firms provided credit default swap data.

And this does not refer to exchange derivatives, like futures contracts which are small by comparison. What it does refer to are the unregulated derivatives contracts between hedge funds, pension funds, banks, insurance companies, etc.

Interestingly, Mr. Buffett had previously stated banks simply have no idea what their exposure could be. "When Charlie [Munger, his business partner] and I finish reading the long footnotes detailing the derivatives activities of major banks, the only thing we understand is that we don't understand how much risk the institution is taking."

Also, the $6 billion loss in natural gas by the Amaranth hedge fund demonstrates how even experienced traders can suddenly and unexpectedly undergo a tremendous loss. This begs the question that if the financial system were to experience a major shock how would that possibly be covered?

Mr. Buffett has said that such highly complex financial instruments are time bombs and "financial weapons of mass destruction" that could harm not only their buyers and sellers, but the whole economic system.

Az, Per your request:"Article VII claims that sovereign states deliberately chose to join the association. Article V and VI, however, informed them that joining said association would lead to their acceptance of subsequent amendments (whether they voted for them or not, even possibly without their legislature's approval).

Also, chipping away at state sovereignty, Article VI asserted: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Thus, state laws that violated the Constitution would no longer fly and all state officials were required to forego their state actions for the Constitution. As such, there is no "inherent" state right to secession."

Dee wrote, "Besides, Bush was best friends with Saudi Arabia, the place where the majority of terrorists were from. Additionally we are friends with China and Russia. Their atrocities are much worse than any you can claim for Venezuela."

And yet it wasn't Bush who bowed to the Saudi King, it was some guy named Obama! Hugo Chavez insulted America on a number of occasions -- no reason to shake hands with the idiot. I noticed Obama was not pleased to have the book handed to him by Chavez.

Considered as transactions under the Constitution, the ordinance of secession, adopted by the convention, and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the acts of her legislature intended to give [p701] effect to that ordinance, were absolutely NULL. They were utterly without operation in law. The State did not cease to be a State, nor her citizens to be citizens of the Union.

Not only did the Supreme Court declare Secession unconstitutional, the Court said the Confiscation acts were constitutional; constitutional to confiscate property of rebels.

MILLER v. UNITED STATES.

December Term, 1870

[78 U.S. 268, 269] ERROR to the Circuit Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.

This was a proceeding begun originally in the District Court for the district just named, to forfeit certain personal property belonging to one Samuel Miller, now deceased, in his lifetime, under the act of Congress of August 6th, 1861, entitled 'An act to confiscate property used for insurrectionary purposes;'1 and the act of July 17th, 1862, entitled 'An act to suppress insurrection, to punish treason and rebellion, to seize and confiscate the property of rebels, and for other purposes.'

Dee wrote, "Quite a spin you have. How about a dose of reality for each of your points:..."

1. Obama isn't just bailing out the economy; he's spending a ton of money on his pet projects that have little or nothing to do with fixing the financial mess.

2. The other shoe hasn't dropped yet when it comes to taxation. How is he going to pay the bill for all of his profligate spending? Sooner or later the chickens will come home to roost along with hyperinflation. Who will you blame that on 5 years hence?

3. Obama wants the UAW to make more major concessions -- how does that grab you?

4. Who knows where the power grab will ultimately lead -- Soviet style socialism?

Ultima,Our President is being diplomatic. This is not like the game of King of the Hill that Bush/Cheney liked to play. Our President should be diplomatic and Presidential with all foreign countries and not get in pxssin' matches with other countries. That is the reason we are in Iraq. That is the reason Bush went head to head with Chavez and most of Europe.

You and your side might hate France, Spain and Mexico, but they are our allies and we should treat them as such. And if we can do the same with Venezuela, Cuba, Iran as we did with China and Russia, then perhaps we may see Peace in the World and Diplomacy instead of the terrorists gaining allies against us!

Dee wrote, "Our President is being diplomatic. This is not like the game of King of the Hill that Bush/Cheney liked to play. Our President should be diplomatic and Presidential with all foreign countries and not get in pxssin' matches with other countries. That is the reason we are in Iraq. That is the reason Bush went head to head with Chavez and most of Europe."

We can agree that our president should be diplomatic. However, that does not require bowing to a despotic potentate or being unusually cordial to someone who has insulted the U.S. I don't believe being undiplomatic had anything to do with our being in Iraq. There are many reasons and that is not among them. Protecting our oil supplies, the potential for the development of wmds, unfinished business left over from the first Iraq war, Sadam Hussain's penchant for genocide against the Kurds, an interest in spreading democracy in that part of the world, etc.

There is no need to get into pxssing contest with our enemies but neither is there a need to be cordial to those who insult us. How much better it would be if we developed our own gas and oil resources and let Hugo Chavez and his ilk sell their oil to China and India. He'll find the Chinese will ultimately be less cordial than we are if he tries to nationalize any investments they make in is country.

Ultima,What I am saying is, there is no need to make Chavez our enemy just because he may be egotistical. He was elected by the people of Venezuela. We may not agree with his politics, but we can agree to get along with him vs making him our enemy.

Chavez is a Madman of Vulgarity and Aggression. He has supported criminals that kidnap people for money and plant Land Mines to kill peasant children in Colombia. And that murder and kidnap Americans in Colombia. The FARC Guerrillas. There are hundreds of video hours to prove this statement. The FARC has killed dozens of Americans.

Forget about Latin American Unity -The USA is still necessary to keep at bay some Vulgar Indecent Madmen like Chavez, the Castros, Ortega and Correa.

By the end of a 45-minute one-on-one conversation, Uribe had gotten what he wanted. He received his first invitation to Washington, effective immediately, and as if that weren’t enough, he got Obama to promise to visit Colombia.

On a small piece of paper, and in English, Uribe wrote the three items: 1) Security with democratic values, 2) Investment with social responsibility, and 3) Social cohesion. Explanations about each one, and the way the administration’s policies reflect them would be much appreciated.

Uribe showed the paper to reporters, which Obama signed: “To President Uribe – with admiration.” Was Obama not supposed to keep that?

Ultima,The other shoe was thrown at Bush's head. If we continued his policy we would soon be in another WW with NO allies. One thing is clear, the Bush/Cheney world domination theories and practices did NOT work!

I admire Obama for moving forward in a positive way.

Like a crystal, there are many sides/views to each step our President makes and each word spoken. I think we should allow him time to fix the economy and time to return to diplomacy.

We all gave Bush 8 years. We can at least give Obama 1 or 2 years before we begin bashing him.

"And if we can do the same with Venezuela, Cuba, Iran as we did with China and Russia, then perhaps we may see Peace in the World and Diplomacy instead of the terrorists gaining allies against us!"Well, of course. This country has a long track record of propping up ruthless dictators for our own benefit. I guess we believe that sacrificing the freedom of others is ok as long as it means protecting our 'freedom'.

And for at least a couple of years, support our President and stand United towards his/our country's success."

I'm sure there was criticism of Bush from day one. As they say, "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen."

I'm not sure anyone is calling him a Nazi but there are many parallels between his rise to power and that of Hitler. That doesn't make him an advocate of genicide or crematoriums. It might make him an advocate of a national socialist worker party (National Socialism). Think about it. Should we be in favor of that. Is it incumbent upon us to approve that direction of the Obama policies?

I see someone return the favor for Ahmandinejad the other day and then a bunch of diplomats simply walked out when he accused Israel of racism. Too bad the Pro-America movement doesn't have a similar forum so we could throw a car load of shoes and then walk out on people like El Duque.

Dee wrote,"What I am saying is, there is no need to make Chavez our enemy just because he may be egotistical. He was elected by the people of Venezuela. We may not agree with his politics, but we can agree to get along with him vs making him our enemy."

How far would you be willing to go to shake hands with a skinhead or white supremicist? Would you accept an offered hand and a copy of one their extremist tracts?

There is a limit to how far a president should go to curry favor. Chavez laughed all the way home.

Castro has already sent Obama a message which in effect says,"We're not looking for a new and more open relationship with the U.S."

There is something to be said for him in terms of the number of different issues he is willing to tackle in short order -- a little like Gingrich's Contract with America. The proof of the pudding will be in the eating. He may fail not because of resistance from those who don't like his drift to the extreme left but because he has tried to do more than is possible in Washington given all the power that resides in Congress. A narrower focus might have enabled him to succeed where this diffuse approach may not.

Page Hits

PASS THE DREAM ACT & COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM NOW!

Facebook Badge: Immigration Talk with a Mexican American

(click on picture to link to Facebook Page)

Immigration Talk with a Mexican American

Blog Mission

A PRO Forum where people, both PRO and ANTI, can discuss American Immigration Issues and Political Issues civilly, freely and safely thereby reducing the hate, anger and misunderstandings currently inherent in most of these discussions.

About This Blog

This Blog promotes the discussion of opinions of the Blog Owner and commenters who wish to participate in the discussion about Immigration Issues and Political Issues.

Many blog entries contain details from actual news articles and urls are included for reader reference.

In some instances, individuals referenced in the blog are defendants who may be coming to trial or whose trial is in progress. All defendants are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

It should be noted by all Blog Readers and this is to officially confirm that for all articles on this blog where court cases have not been ruled upon, the word ALLEGED is inserted prior to the defendants name/crime.

MY BOOKS

About Me

Hello. My name is Dee. I live in Texas. I am an American. My ethnicity is Hispanic. Many would call me Mexican or Mexican American. Some call me a female, PRO-Immigration Reform - Ann Coulter.
My parents, their parents and theirs were all born in the USA.
My husband and I have been happily married for over 20 years. My husband is a big, Irish-American. We have two grown sons. We are happy and my family is doing well. I have been employed as a mid level manager at a very large, well known corporation for over 25 years, now recently retired.
In May, 2006, after the Immigration Marches, I started seeing the cable news channels talking very negatively about illegal immigration. I found many internet sites were talking negatively about legal and illegal immigration issues as well.
Since I do research on the job, I started conducting Immigration research on the web. I joined several Immigration websites and I researched others. I´ve learned so much about Immigration issues over the last year.
What you don´t see on the internet is the Mexican American perspective.
I am here to share my views with you.